You may not like that you're not making as much off them as you'd want, but that's not Apples fault.
You can either rewrite your laws to avoid confusion in the future or shut up.
And no, rewriting your laws don't give you the right to charge backtracked that "would have been owed" if this law was in place then. You can only start fresh and move forward.
Why? Because Apple abode by your laws and did everything they were supposed to do. Legally.
The stupidity astounds.
Ah you might want to check the facts just a tad more closely. The Government of Ireland is DEFENDING their Apple policy. Against the EU.
Thusly: "The minister claimed that any findings against the country would be "based on very thin legal grounds" and challenged in the European Court of Justice...."
Anything that distorts tax that should be due by such methods as licensing from one high tax country to a low tax country and thereby transferring profit made in one country to another needs addressing. This is why today the OECD / G20 countries made proposals to address tax avoidance by multinational companies. Governments across the world are finally waking up to the fact that they are being short changed. For example, it was reported by the BBC that in the UK Over 14 years Starbucks had 3 billion poounds of sales but paid less than 9 million pounds in corporation tax. As well as not paying the tax that should reasonably be due in the UK they also have an unfair advantage over local businesses who are unable to transfer profit abroad.
No government is being "shortchanged", that's absurd. People don't owe their property and freedom to their government.
Why is the investigation into Apple, not the tax loopholes themselves? Since when are loopholes placed by the policy writers the fault of the companies that use them? Sure, many of them were put in place from lobbying by corporations, but considering how Apple has only recently started increasing their lobbying in recent years and how long these tax laws have been in place in Ireland, I don't see how Apple could be responsible for its existence.
This is not about Apple, it is about the Irish government giving some companies (by coincidence Apple is one of them) an unfair advantage. By European law it is forbidden for governments to attract companies by giving these companies specially tailored conditions. Because in the EU companies can freely move around their income and as such are only paying corporate tax in a single member state, there are rules to have a fair tax competition between member states.
The normal corporate tax rate in Ireland is 12.5%, so it should apply to all companies. It is just logical that the European Commission is investigating why Apple is only paying 2.5%. If the European Commssion finds Irish government guilty of granting unfair tax conditions, it can force the Irish government to retroactively apply the normal conditions. In this case Apple should pay the outstanding amount.
And if it no longer benefits Ireland they should abandon the Euro and the EU at the end of whatever legal wrangling occurs.
The Euro is irrelevant in this case.
Abandonning the EU is killing the chicken with the golden eggs. A lot of international companies need somewhere in the EU a daughter company that is responsible for the whole EU business. Currently a lot of these daughters are in Ireland because of the language, distance to the US and low corporate tax rates. If Ireland woud leave the EU, these daughters will be moved to another EU member state.
Tax havens are like leeches draining the lifeblood of the countries where sales are made and taxes should be paid.
In Australia's case it's Singapore we have the ludicrous situation that a ship leaves Australia carrying iron ore or coal directly to China, somehow a higher price is paid by the Chinese to the Australian company in Singapore who then pay a lower price to it's branch in Australia.
If I buy a Mac or an iPhone, a copy of Windows or lots of other stuff, it all gets paid for in Singapore even though nothing physically has been there.
At least Apple has had a physical business up and running in Ireland for decades.
If worse comes to worse they can asset strip it, declare bankruptcy and dump it.
Tax havens are like leeches draining the lifeblood of the countries where sales are made and taxes should be paid.
In Australia's case it's Singapore we have the ludicrous situation that a ship leaves Australia carrying iron ore or coal directly to China, somehow a higher price is paid by the Chinese to the Australian company in Singapore who then pay a lower price to it's branch in Australia.
If I buy a Mac or an iPhone, a copy of Windows or lots of other stuff, it all gets paid for in Singapore even though nothing physically has been there.
At least Apple has had a physical business up and running in Ireland for decades.
If worse comes to worse they can asset strip it, declare bankruptcy and dump it.
Michael Noonan, Ireland’s Minister for Finance, told UK’s Telegraph in December that Ireland was closing the so-called “stateless” company loophole. “We have addressed the ‘stateless’ company issue in the budget,” said Noonan. However, Apple will still be able to take advantage of Ireland’s tax loopholes by simply moving its subsidiaries’ tax residences to a location with zero corporate tax. According to the Australian Financial Review, Apple began shifting its Australian profits through Apple South Asia Pte Ltd., a Singapore-based subsidiary, in 2010. It should be noted that Singapore has no corporate tax.
Michael Noonan, Ireland’s Minister for Finance, told UK’s Telegraph in December that Ireland was closing the so-called “stateless” company loophole. “We have addressed the ‘stateless’ company issue in the budget,” said Noonan. However, Apple will still be able to take advantage of Ireland’s tax loopholes by simply moving its subsidiaries’ tax residences to a location with zero corporate tax. According to the Australian Financial Review, Apple began shifting its Australian profits through Apple South Asia Pte Ltd., a Singapore-based subsidiary, in 2010. It should be noted that Singapore has no corporate tax.
Good for Singapore and to hell with Australia and Ireland if they get any funny ideas about enforcing retroactive punitive taxation.
Why is the investigation into Apple, not the tax loopholes themselves? Since when are loopholes placed by the policy writers the fault of the companies that use them? Sure, many of them were put in place from lobbying by corporations, but considering how Apple has only recently started increasing their lobbying in recent years and how long these tax laws have been in place in Ireland, I don't see how Apple could be responsible for its existence.
"will decide whether its tax arrangements with Apple violated state aid rules" > A violation is not a loophole.
"will decide whether its tax arrangements with Apple violated state aid rules" > A violation is not a loophole.
1) Thanks (as well to others for making that more clear).
2) Would the violation then be Ireland's responsibility, not Apple and the other countries since they are the ones that made the erroneous deal against EU laws, assuming it's proven to be a violation?
Yet it would be Ireland's violation of EU rules since they agreed to the deal.
So if Ireland is found to have violated EU regulations and loses any appeals. Would not Apple have a damages case against Ireland if it is forced to pay retrospectively? After all, Apple might not have been running its operations in Ireland if not for Ireland's tax laws.
So if Ireland is found to have violated EU regulations and loses any appeals. Would not Apple have a damages case against Ireland if it is forced to pay retrospectively? After all, Apple might not have been running its operations in Ireland if not for Ireland's tax laws.
That is exactly why Apple is running it's operations from Ireland.
The big problem for Apple is if Ireland loses then all that tax that wasn't collected because of the deal becomes payable.
That is exactly why Apple is running it's operations from Ireland.
The big problem for Apple is if Ireland loses then all that tax that wasn't collected because of the deal becomes payable.
I don't think you understood my post the way it was intended.
So if Ireland is found to have violated EU regulations and loses any appeals. Would not Apple have a damages case against Ireland if it is forced to pay retrospectively? After all, Apple might not have been running its operations in Ireland if not for Ireland's tax laws.
They'd certainly have an argument but it may solely be a defense against penalties while the uncollected tax would still be due.
The location argument I don't have an option on, that's a lot more complicated: maybe if there's a signed agreement stating IF they get these financial aspects from Ireland Apple will invest in these facilities. That "contract" gets broken then your suggestion would seem to have merit. I just have no idea how those things are structured.
I don't think you understood my post the way it was intended.
Looking back on your post you're right.
So if I'm reading your post correctly this time. Unless there's a clause in the agreement that Ireland would indemnify Apple, Apple will still have to stump up the back tax. Considering its hasn't been repatriated then that shouldn't be a problem!
Apple obeyed Irish law and paid Irish taxes correctly. The E.U. which is not a country but a giant free trade agreement may find that Ireland has broken EU rules by providing Apple with an unfair advantage. It seems to me that while the EU may be within it's rights to punish Ireland, I don't see where they can have a right to punish Apple. And even Ireland should not be able to order any back payments if they have already confirmed Apple is in complete compliance with their laws. In the USA and Canada, governments don't get to do that, even if government employees err in signing tax agreements.
Comments
Thusly: "The minister claimed that any findings against the country would be "based on very thin legal grounds" and challenged in the European Court of Justice...."
"Astound" away. ????
No government is being "shortchanged", that's absurd. People don't owe their property and freedom to their government.
Why is the investigation into Apple, not the tax loopholes themselves? Since when are loopholes placed by the policy writers the fault of the companies that use them? Sure, many of them were put in place from lobbying by corporations, but considering how Apple has only recently started increasing their lobbying in recent years and how long these tax laws have been in place in Ireland, I don't see how Apple could be responsible for its existence.
This is not about Apple, it is about the Irish government giving some companies (by coincidence Apple is one of them) an unfair advantage. By European law it is forbidden for governments to attract companies by giving these companies specially tailored conditions. Because in the EU companies can freely move around their income and as such are only paying corporate tax in a single member state, there are rules to have a fair tax competition between member states.
The normal corporate tax rate in Ireland is 12.5%, so it should apply to all companies. It is just logical that the European Commission is investigating why Apple is only paying 2.5%. If the European Commssion finds Irish government guilty of granting unfair tax conditions, it can force the Irish government to retroactively apply the normal conditions. In this case Apple should pay the outstanding amount.
And if it no longer benefits Ireland they should abandon the Euro and the EU at the end of whatever legal wrangling occurs.
The Euro is irrelevant in this case.
Abandonning the EU is killing the chicken with the golden eggs. A lot of international companies need somewhere in the EU a daughter company that is responsible for the whole EU business. Currently a lot of these daughters are in Ireland because of the language, distance to the US and low corporate tax rates. If Ireland woud leave the EU, these daughters will be moved to another EU member state.
Tax havens are like leeches draining the lifeblood of the countries where sales are made and taxes should be paid.
In Australia's case it's Singapore we have the ludicrous situation that a ship leaves Australia carrying iron ore or coal directly to China, somehow a higher price is paid by the Chinese to the Australian company in Singapore who then pay a lower price to it's branch in Australia.
If I buy a Mac or an iPhone, a copy of Windows or lots of other stuff, it all gets paid for in Singapore even though nothing physically has been there.
At least Apple has had a physical business up and running in Ireland for decades.
If worse comes to worse they can asset strip it, declare bankruptcy and dump it.
http://www.cheatsheet.com/technology/heres-how-apples-australian-profits-ended-up-in-ireland.html/?a=viewall
From the link you posted:-
Michael Noonan, Ireland’s Minister for Finance, told UK’s Telegraph in December that Ireland was closing the so-called “stateless” company loophole. “We have addressed the ‘stateless’ company issue in the budget,” said Noonan. However, Apple will still be able to take advantage of Ireland’s tax loopholes by simply moving its subsidiaries’ tax residences to a location with zero corporate tax. According to the Australian Financial Review, Apple began shifting its Australian profits through Apple South Asia Pte Ltd., a Singapore-based subsidiary, in 2010. It should be noted that Singapore has no corporate tax.
Good for Singapore and to hell with Australia and Ireland if they get any funny ideas about enforcing retroactive punitive taxation.
Why is the investigation into Apple, not the tax loopholes themselves? Since when are loopholes placed by the policy writers the fault of the companies that use them? Sure, many of them were put in place from lobbying by corporations, but considering how Apple has only recently started increasing their lobbying in recent years and how long these tax laws have been in place in Ireland, I don't see how Apple could be responsible for its existence.
"will decide whether its tax arrangements with Apple violated state aid rules" > A violation is not a loophole.
1) Thanks (as well to others for making that more clear).
2) Would the violation then be Ireland's responsibility, not Apple and the other countries since they are the ones that made the erroneous deal against EU laws, assuming it's proven to be a violation?
So if Ireland is found to have violated EU regulations and loses any appeals. Would not Apple have a damages case against Ireland if it is forced to pay retrospectively? After all, Apple might not have been running its operations in Ireland if not for Ireland's tax laws.
The big problem for Apple is if Ireland loses then all that tax that wasn't collected because of the deal becomes payable.
I don't think you understood my post the way it was intended.
So if Ireland is found to have violated EU regulations and loses any appeals. Would not Apple have a damages case against Ireland if it is forced to pay retrospectively? After all, Apple might not have been running its operations in Ireland if not for Ireland's tax laws.
They'd certainly have an argument but it may solely be a defense against penalties while the uncollected tax would still be due.
The location argument I don't have an option on, that's a lot more complicated: maybe if there's a signed agreement stating IF they get these financial aspects from Ireland Apple will invest in these facilities. That "contract" gets broken then your suggestion would seem to have merit. I just have no idea how those things are structured.
www.*****.com/sites/timworstall/2015/10/07/american-corporations-have-vast-untaxed-offshore-profits-so/
***** = forbes
So if I'm reading your post correctly this time. Unless there's a clause in the agreement that Ireland would indemnify Apple, Apple will still have to stump up the back tax. Considering its hasn't been repatriated then that shouldn't be a problem!
In the USA and Canada, governments don't get to do that, even if government employees err in signing tax agreements.